It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Teacher kicks student from class for saying there are only two genders

page: 6
42
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Krazysh0t

IN those articles they link to more studies so it would probably be worth your while if you are interested to read more on it !

I'm not going to read your partisan rags. So tell you what. You link to me the studies you think are important there. You've already got a strike against you for linking to a study you clearly didn't read since the conclusion directly contradicted your opinion on the matter. So I'm not going to put out the effort to read partisan drivel when I specifically asked for science.


here is another one you may find interesting

gender construct - gender differences

Sex differences in childrens toy preferences

Gender similarities Hypotheses

www.apa.org...

Oh goody! This is fun! I hope you actually read these ones this time.

Let's start with the Gendered Toys study you posted. First, I'm 100% not sure why you even linked it. It really has nothing to do with what we are discussing. But alas, I looked at it anyways. Here's the conclusion:

In observational studies of the type reviewed here, it is impossible to determine the degree to which findings are a result of biological predisposition or environment. However, this study attempted to assess the variables most likely to be indicative of either nature or nurture and must conclude that there is some (circumstantial) evidence for both sides of the argument. When assessing the effect of publication year, we suggest that there is more evidence of the effect of environment on girls' than on boys' toy preferences. In the assessment of the effects of age, it could be argued that social effects on boys are stronger or persist longer than those on girls or, alternatively, that there is a stronger biological predisposition for boys' attraction to particular object features. However, these suggestions are necessarily speculative, and we recommend that experimental evidence is required in order to shed light on the specific questions that are identified in the meta‐analysis, including the nuances of social influence.

In other words: Inconclusive but there are signs that children choose gendered toys based on societal pressures. So I'd say this leans more to saying that gender isn't an innate part of our biology but social constructed. So it again contradicts your narrative. Luckily for you that the study is inconclusive and you can't really draw any definitive results one way or the other from it.

Ok. Let's do the other link about Gender Similarities Hypothesis. Ok so this is something I'm already familiar with. It's basically the idea that male and female humans are more alike than we realize. This hypothesis is actually partially confirmed with how easy it is to transition as a transgender person by just taking hormones. Most of the secondary sex characteristics will easily develop even much later in life. You can also compare humans to other animals in the wild and see that the differences between men and women are vastly smaller than the differences between the different genders of other, different species. As it is still a hypothesis, it is great food for thought, but it isn't an accepted theory.

Also, I'm not sure why you linked this link to me either. Did you not understand what it was saying? Because it doesn't support your argument in the slightest. Or were you just trying to be helpful and educate me on this topic?
edit on 18-6-2019 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

go into the forest its safer away from all the other humans !



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Ok... Show me. Demonstrate to me how these studies are flawed. Just saying they are flawed isn't going to magically make me believe you when I've been requesting to see these studies the whole time I've been commenting in the thread. To me this sounds like you are you just dismissing the science because it says something you don't want it to say.


What a freaking copout... and power play.

Asking you to prove your point is a "copout and power play?"


You want to make a claim and prove it, then do it. Google seems to be your friend so what's the problem? You'll get far more than I could give you. Do your own damn research if you want it posted. No one has to jump through your hoops to prove or disprove anything.

I haven't made any claims. Hun. You've made all the claims. Yet here you are telling me to do your research.


Just be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.

Damn. If only you were serious here instead of just lashing out angrily cause I asked you to prove your point scientifically...


DON'T MISGENDER ME!!! I'm so invalidated now... I need to go find a safe space...
Haha! Funny. It's not like "guys" isn't a gender neutral term or anything, but hey. Let's make fun of the sjw instead of actually putting up a response with some meat behind the content proving its case. That sounds like it'll work! (this is a /s if not obvious)



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf
a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, see? Just avoid using the word gender and they have nothing. It’s politics, not science.


It's definitely become politics!!!

The saddest part is that I don't even think trans identifying people and their advocates even understand that they are simply political pawns in all this. And their need for validation makes them willing pawns.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

LOL!

It's been fun. And now I'm done with you.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: TheSteppenwolf
a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, see? Just avoid using the word gender and they have nothing. It’s politics, not science.


It's definitely become politics!!!

The saddest part is that I don't even think trans identifying people and their advocates even understand that they are simply political pawns in all this. And their need for validation makes them willing pawns.



Gender is a term of art. Sex is a term of science. Only “sex” refers to the different biological and physiological characteristics of males and females, such as reproductive organs, chromosomes, hormones, etc.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Krazysh0t

LOL!

It's been fun. And now I'm done with you.

Nice talking to you. Sorry that you yet again are unwilling to prove your point about the TERF rhetoric you use all the time.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Boadicea

go into the forest its safer away from all the other humans !


Yes... yes... excellent idea!

I much prefer furry four-legged critters to the hairy two-legged any day!



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How fast do you read or do you just skip to the conclusions , FTL eyes

they aren't my rags mate , i'm just doing a quick google search on "biological evidence for gender"

and looking at what journals may be relevant to what we are discussing about "evidence" in biology for gender

I'm just trying to get us discussing the subject because I find it highly interesting, but it does require people willing to look at conflicting opinions and articles that those people link hahahah !



From that first study they state


Gender: as will be outlined later, Gender can have different meanings. Males and females behave differently, and furthermore, not all genetically male or female organisms display the typical reproduction-oriented behaviour typical for their genetic sex. Sex and gender are invariably properties of the whole body, meaning that all cells participate.

Calcigender: Males and females differ in their Ca2+ physiology (Fig. 1). Females remove more Ca2+ through their reproductive system than males. The term was introduced by De Loof [2].



Under this definition then any differing behaviour in one human to the next means they are a different gender from those expressing typical reproduction-orineted behaviour . Even down to the cellular level

so scientifically it wouldnt make sense to record the total 7.53 billion different genders from one human to the next because the differences are so minute as not to make any difference


Hence, there is no need to make subcategories in the gender variants with the purpose to install a moral hierarchy as they are all physiologically equal


And if that is the case then why are we expected to socially accept every single gender of every human on earth if there is no reason to make subcategories of the gender variants or the typical male / female duality

I think that science is being lead by "feels " rather than objective facts

to me ultimately what that report is saying is that we are all different yet the same ! hahaha


edit on 18-6-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TheSteppenwolf


Gender is a term of art.


It's also become a term of abuse... a term of sexism and misogyny... a term of authoritarianism... and so much more.

And the thing is, if the politics were taken out of it, I doubt many people would really care how others "identify," or how they dress or adorn themselves. There have always been tomboys and there have always been dandies.

It's only because of the demands being made by Trans Activism -- the politics -- that it becomes anyone else's concern.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
There are only 2 genders and that's a scientific fact. People trying to invent new genders are either:

A. brainwashed
B. stupid
C. both


D. understand the difference between sex and gender.

There are only two sexes and that's a scientific fact. Gender is a social construct and can be whatever people say it is.

It's not rocket science.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How fast do you read or do you just skip to the conclusions , FTL eyes

I don't have to read the rest of the study if the conclusion contradicts the narrative you are trying to push. Clearly the rest of the evidence within won't align either. Maybe if the conclusion matched your narrative then I'd have more reason to go a bit deeper, but you make it too easy.


they aren't my rags mate , i'm just doing a quick google search on "biological evidence for gender"

Then maybe read your sources before posting them and perhaps understand your evidence too.


and looking at what journals may be relevant to what we are discussing about "evidence" in biology for gender

I'm just trying to get us discussing the subject because I find it highly interesting, but it does require people willing to look at conflicting opinions and articles that those people link hahahah !

And I have looked at the articles you posted. Hence why I was able to point out how they contradict the "two gender" narrative that this thread is intent on pushing as unquestionable fact. It seems to me that you should be directing this line to rest of the people in the thread. Not me.


From that first study they state


Gender: as will be outlined later, Gender can have different meanings. Males and females behave differently, and furthermore, not all genetically male or female organisms display the typical reproduction-oriented behaviour typical for their genetic sex. Sex and gender are invariably properties of the whole body, meaning that all cells participate.

Calcigender: Males and females differ in their Ca2+ physiology (Fig. 1). Females remove more Ca2+ through their reproductive system than males. The term was introduced by De Loof [2].



Under this definition then any differing behaviour in one human to the next means they are a different gender from those expressing typical reproduction-orineted behaviour . Even down to the cellular level

Actually you are wrong here. First, it should be noted that this bit is referring to ALL species that exhibit genders. Not just humans. Second, it goes on to say that not all species of animals exhibit genders how you'd normally expect (in other words, a female of a species may not give birth but the male does instead). Third, it says that gender is a property of the ENTIRE organism. Not just its chromosomes or its reproductive capabilities.


so scientifically it wouldnt make sense to record the total 7.53 billion different genders from one human to the next because the differences are so minute as not to make any difference

No one actually classifies gender that way. Usually it is male, female and non-binary. There may be a few extra terms in there depending on the person you are talking to but you are pitching a straw man here about naming all those unique genders. That's like saying we need a unique name for every Christian in the word because technically since the Bible is open to interpretation then every unique Christian in the world is a part of his or her own denomination. Even though that claim is technically true, it's a silly and a useless waste of effort to do so.



Hence, there is no need to make subcategories in the gender variants with the purpose to install a moral hierarchy as they are all physiologically equal


And if that is the case then why are we expected to socially accept every single gender of every human on earth if there is no reason to make subcategories of the gender variants or the typical male / female duality

This is a false dichotomy. You are saying that either we uniquely name every possible gender out there or we don't have to accept all these extra genders.


I think that science is being lead by "feels " rather than objective facts

I think you need to spend some more time reading these articles a bit more carefully. For one, you still can't get around the fact that every article you've linked disagrees with you. And for two, since you are desperately trying to ignore these articles' conclusions you are thus deeming to cherry pick information from them to support your narrative. AND to make matters worse, you aren't even attempting to fully understand what you are quoting.


to me ultimately what that report is saying is that we are all different yet the same ! hahaha


To me ultimately, the report is saying that there are more than two genders. Being that that is what the conclusion said and all.
edit on 18-6-2019 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I'll just leave this here




posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask



That's it in a nutshell!



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Perfect. That sums it up!



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

"read the". Those are the first two words of your response... Jokes aside. If you admit to not being an authority on the subject, what makes you so sure you are correct? It seems to me that a truly inquisitive person would acknowledge their ignorance assume they are wrong and see what the experts have to say on the matter. Yet you've done none of that with me and are actively resisting it. Why?





I believe


I have 50 years worth of life experience that has shaped my thought. I have learned that I can be wrong and my opinions can change, but for that to happen, I would have to believe what the opposing side is saying. Your tantrums and drama queen antics don't do much on that front.

Science has taught me what I know. Currently there are many people and groups doing studies to try to get data to support their theory that "gender" includes any pronoun the person wishes to be linked to. I know you have looked all this up, so you are aware of how many gender terms there are. None of that makes the previous science that says there are men and women, and no third, fourth, fifth, or 75th, column, any less valid.

What I state here is my opinion, unless I link to something to back up what I state as fact. I don't have to prove my opinion, it's mine. If you wish to pop in here and play the "I can dish it out, but can't bare to take it" card you usually play, go nuts. Most here are painfully aware of your games.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

I have 50 years worth of life experience that has shaped my thought. I have learned that I can be wrong and my opinions can change, but for that to happen, I would have to believe what the opposing side is saying. Your tantrums and drama queen antics don't do much on that front.

Tantrums? I'm literally asking you to prove your point. Why is that so hard to do? Why is that a "tantrum" to you? How is that being a "drama queen"? Why are you ad hominem attacking me instead of just proving your point? I'm actually trying to be polite to you for once and haven't once said anything mean to you or assumed anything about you. It was you who couldn't resist sniping me about me leaving ATS cause apparently I can't take being wrong. So I'm not really sure what you are talking about here and truly wondering why you are projecting your own actions on to me.


Science has taught me what I know. Currently there are many people and groups doing studies to try to get data to support their theory that "gender" includes any pronoun the person wishes to be linked to. I know you have looked all this up, so you are aware of how many gender terms there are. None of that makes the previous science that says there are men and women, and no third, fourth, fifth, or 75th, column, any less valid.

Actually it does... The mere fact of how science works is that as new evidence is presented to override the old evidence it replaces it. So old ideas that are found to be inadequate are discarded. Thus, yes, in fact new science does override previous science that says there are men and women, and no third, fourth, fifth, or 75th, column, any less valid provided that the new science contradicts the previous science and more accurately reflects the data collected.

Since I'm content not to make any claims in this thread and just go by the proof offered up in it instead, I'll reference the two articles posted by sapien. According to those studies, gender is on a spectrum and there are many of them. Not just two. Also, the second study puts forth a case for gender being a social construct and we assume gender roles through our environment. It goes on to suggest the rate of assumption can vary depending on gender. Interesting stuff. Anyways, so going by the proof in the thread there is more evidence presented demonstrating that gender is on a spectrum. While the only thing I've gotten in defense of there being two genders is a lot of gnashing of the teeth, insults, and general nastiness. I do believe one person threatened me with the evidence like I'd regret it then quit the conversation when I asked for it anyways.

So yea. The words spoken stand for themselves. Once again, I've made no claims and have attacked nobody in this thread. I'm going to keep reiterating that point so it isn't lost in your attempt to slander me.


What I state here is my opinion, unless I link to something to back up what I state as fact. I don't have to prove my opinion, it's mine. If you wish to pop in here and play the "I can dish it out, but can't bare to take it" card you usually play, go nuts. Most here are painfully aware of your games.

Facts don't care about your feelings.



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   
The problem with "facts" and "proof" ...

Every time someone posts a link or posts information that supports their point...

someone else comes along to say it's not "real" proof and that it's some site pushing the opposite agenda and has no credibility at all.

Happens in every hot thead...pretty much no one will accept "proof" from a source espousing an opposing viewpoint.

I think the whole thing is simply a misdirection to keep an argument going in circles until someone simply gives up.

Back when I was in school, the days when we used to chisel stuff in stone, we used sex and gender interchangably. There were 2 sexes (except for a small percentage of anomolies) and 2 genders. Even paper of the time often supporte that.

Kinda like how there was "caucasian, hispanic, black, other"

Times are changing though (and the paperwork along with it).

For me, there's always only going to be 2 sexes and 2 genders. I'm too old and tired to keep track of what I consider nonsense.

If people want to believe there are multiple sexes and unlimited genders, more power to them.

In my life, I can't tel you how many times science and facts changed - what was once good for me is now bad and vice versa. Makes my head spin.

I try to be polite to people and what they believe in, even if it disagrees with what I believe in and expect them to do the same. Just like flat-eathers and round-eathers...I'm sure we can co-exist in peace.

As long as people aren't trying to force me to accept this change as truth, we're good..unfortunately people are trying to force this change.

Changes of this magnatude should happen gradually, naturally and over time...by forcing it, all that's being done is creating huge divisions between us as a pepole and nation and setting in resentment, hatred and in-tolerance.

And gee, that makes things so much better, doesn't it?



posted on Jun, 18 2019 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Thanatos0042

There's a lot of wisdom in your post.





As long as people aren't trying to force me to accept this change as truth, we're good..unfortunately people are trying to force this change.



And, therein, lies the problem. I feel the same way. We should not be forced/pressured/compelled to accept something that is wonky fake science. Perhaps the condition does fall under a "science" category, but it would be in the psychological and/or behavioral sciences category.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join